unfortunately the industry is encouraging games of violent types.

The games should be funny enough for the kids at same time puzzles and brainteasers are really good.

developers should think in this way to produce creative and entertaining stuff for kids.

I encourage you to try out and let us know what you think of our new game ThreadSpace:Hyperbol, we love it and so do our testers… we think it is something entirely different to what is currently out there although it does take from many genres. Here is our website: http://www.hyperbol.com

-Stuart

Exactly my point of view, we (the ones around 30) lived in what I call the Golden Age of Videogames, back then new ideas were born every day and games made history because of the gameplay not because of polygons or gore scenarios, now originality lacks from the majority of the games. Anyway, being a golden age gamer has it advantages: we experienced excelent games and we know exactly what to buy .

The popular genres nowadays may be far-apart from each other, though there is the occasional droplet of blue in the ocean of red, green and yellow (I am quite aware yellow is the mix of red and green [when speaking of electromagnetic radiation, in the form of light], thank you, take it as things apart), for which many are thankful.

Among all the MMOs, GTAs, hack’n’slashers, Street Fighter clones, football games (though some of which are good value, don’t get me wrong), along comes a Katamari Damacy (never played this one, though the concept looks new), a retro-gem like Viewtiful Joe, an easy-on-the-brain Crimsonland or even the altogether bizarre Hover Bovver (hope I got the name right).

Now, why are sequels popular? There are many reasons, though the main eventers might be the following:
– the game’s story was left unwrapped;
– the concept is entertaining;
– when talking about racers, sporters and the like, one often looks for either the most realistic or most entertaining (there are reported occurences of a game being both) experiences. Pro Evolution Soccer and Sensible Soccer are an example of this dicotomy, like Mario Kart and Gran Turismo are.

This is why they didn’t stop at Mario Party 1, it’s on 7 now, if I’m not wrong, and the concept hasn’t changed one bit. Why? It sells, that’s why. Of course one can always “reinvent the genre” and all that crap, but how far can you go? Go too far, and it’s another type of game altogether. This must not be an excuse for “change the cover, the colours, add one or two things, change some crap, and start burning DVDs” behaviour, though.

If certain genres are proven to sell, and seeing as the gaming producers are an industry, this is the most important part of the game-making equation.

Risks are taken every now and then, but the “all-powerful, blockbusting, plaguelike-spread” genres are hard to go around.

To provide an example, even Nintendo, viewed as one of the world’s few remaining creative parties (in the gaming market), has stuck with their initial concepts of some of their characteristic games. Mario Kart, Mario Party, The Legend of Zelda have undergone several face-lifts, but they’re still (slightly) different approaches at the same idea.

Nowadays, you have to spend money to make games that better make money, back then I don’t think you had to spend as much (I can be wrong) as one has to today. This is the main reason why it’s so hard to innovate, unless you’re too good not to go unnoticed, ex: Molyneux.